Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Minister of the Environment for sending us a copy of her ministerial statement this morning, and I urge her to keep doing so.
As vice-chairman of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development, I am pleased to be able to discuss in a non-partisan manner the role of a future environmental auditor general.
I believe that the announcement made this afternoon by the Minister of the Environment clearly demonstrates her desire to keep the commitments made in the red book. So, the government
promises it will consult us, as well as Canadians and Quebecers through public hearings.
It is a good thing to consult, but the recent budget tabled by the Minister of Finance was a very concrete opportunity where the government could have demonstrated its will to do something about the environment.
Of course, the Department of the Environment is one of the few whose budget was increased. We can only be thankful for this 4.1 per cent increase. However, some measures go against sustainable development, even if the minister alluded to a committee which will try to promote it. The best example of this short-term vision, which is the opposite of the objective of sustainable development, is the fact that the government increases-listen to this-the government increases by $18.4 million the budget to clean up the St. Lawrence River, but reduces by $5 million the budget to clean up the Great Lakes, when we know that 40 per cent of the pollution in the St. Lawrence River comes from the Great Lakes. So much for sustainable development. On the one hand, the government increases the budget to clean up the river, while on the other hand it reduces the one for the polluted waters which flow into that river. Whatever happened to cohesion and co-operation between departments?
The Minister of the Environment says that she wants to put an end to overlapping. Right now, the most obvious overlapping is the one blocking any action concerning the Irving Whale . Transport Canada commissions study after study that Environment Canada never sees and they keep sending the ball back and forth. In the end, nothing concrete comes of it. When you see two federal departments get in each other's way like that, thus delaying concrete action, it is easy to understand that the people of Quebec want to have in their own hands the power to make decisions.
In her speech, the hon. minister stated, and I quote: "The government is also determined to make our country a leader in sustainable development. The government will be able to show leadership in getting our own house in order". The Official Opposition is prepared to believe these fine words except that, when we hear from Statistics Canada that this country exported 200,000 tons of hazardous waste to Asia and Latin America from 1990 to 1993, we wonder if that is the kind of house cleaning involved in the ministers plans.
The minister told us that the government and the Prime Minister must recognize the fundamental link between economic health and a healthy environment. She also praised the Minister of Finance for recognizing that economy and environment are not competing, but complementary.
It is true that environmental considerations are prominent is the red book. It is also true that it conveys the importance of integrating the economy, and thus the industry, with the environment. This spirit of co-operation was made manifest by organizing consultations on the environmental industry last January.
Why is there nothing then to that effect in Growing Small Businesses , the information booklet on new programs and guidelines for small business?
I was quite surprised, Mr. Speaker, to see there is no mention of environmental concerns anywhere in the document's 52 pages.
The government must give its support to this sector, either by implementing programs or by promoting initiatives to encourage the private sector to adopt a sustainable development approach.
It makes good sense, politically, to table a budget allocating more money to the Department of the Environment. Unfortunately, these inconsistencies show that it is only a smoke screen.
In closing, the Bloc Quebecois draws a parallel between the Auditor General of Canada and the environmental auditor general. Before rejoicing and showing off, we should know what kind of follow-up the government will give to the recommendations made by the environmental auditor general. If they are treated the same way as those made by the Auditor General of Canada, the situation is not very encouraging.